First DA:O Review

October 12th, 2009, 15:01

But mages are uber-dangerous, which also fits well with the background lore of the setting. While in most D&D games typically one of the easiest ways to blast through the storyline is to have a band of fighter types, that wouldn't work as well in Dragon Age, where combat is really tough without a mage's AOE damage and crowd control spells and healing (no clerics, so mages fill that role too

There's some info on the specializations. Basicly they give one time attribute bonuses and open up new talents. You can have two specializations per character. You have to unlock them through a quest, trainer or manual. Once unlocked, you can use a specialization point to take an unlocked specialization. These points are gained at levels 7 and 14. You don't have to spend them until you want to. New characters can take already unlocked specializations as soons as they get their first specialization point without having find the quest/trainer/manual.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Sounds a bit excessive and that leads me to believe it's part of the hype campaign, rather than a balanced impartial review.

I hope I'm wrong, though.

Well; it is possible that Dragon Age is that good and the review itself is good too. I should be able to check it myself on Thursday.
Nevertheless PCGamer UK is the last magazine I would trust when I think about cRPG. Very often (e.g. Witcher) I could clearly see that the reviewer didn't play the game for more than a few hours.
What is more, there is a simple pattern:
"Big" games get big scores:
Oblivion: 93 %
Fallout 3: 90%
Fable: 88%

Seriously? Ouch … Those really do look like "gloss" scores to me, more than anything else.

— "Mystery is important. To know everything, to know the whole truth, is dull. There is no magic in that. Magic is not knowing, magic is wondering about what and how and where." ~ Cortez, from The Longest Journey

Originally Posted by kroto
Well; it is possible that Dragon Age is that good and the review itself is good too. I should be able to check it myself on Thursday.
Nevertheless PCGamer UK is the last magazine I would trust when I think about cRPG. Very often (e.g. Witcher) I could clearly see that the reviewer didn't play the game for more than a few hours.
What is more, there is a simple pattern:
"Big" games get big scores:
Oblivion: 93 %
Fallout 3: 90%
Fable: 88%

Certainly instead of “Big” games vs. “Small”(?) games pattern you could say this is just an Anglocentric point of view. cRPG from UK, USA or Canada get big scores and so-called here continental RPGs (from Germany, Poland or Belgium) … well I think you get the picture.

It's almost exactly how I would score those two games as well, so it's an opinion. Gothic just doesn't do it for many, many players. I'm a hardcore crpg'er too, so it's not that. As a general rule, I prefer games that were developed by people who speak English as their primary/only language. English is a very difficult language to master and something is always lost in translation. I would imagine most folks prefer games that are developed in their native language, although there are several people at the Watch who play the English versions of games even if there is a native version available.

crpg"nut" do I need to say more Of course people have different opinions but as a reviewer I think you need to be objective as well…. how someone can think Gothic II is a 62% game is truly beyond me… if it is because of language problems.. I think you could cut some % for that but not 33%……..

Of course since you are not doing an official review you are free to think what you want!

Originally Posted by crpgnut
It's almost exactly how I would score those two games as well, so it's an opinion. Gothic just doesn't do it for many, many players. I'm a hardcore crpg'er too, so it's not that.

Well, to an an extent it is, as Oblivion has no choices, no consequences, no classes, no restrictions, and a fundamentally broken level system that makes any review >80% pandering. Oblivion is a console action game with RPG-lite elements, NOT a hardcore RPG.

Originally Posted by txa1265
Well, to an an extent it is, as Oblivion has no choices, no consequences, no classes, no restrictions, and a fundamentally broken level system that makes any review >80% pandering. Oblivion is a console action game with RPG-lite elements, NOT a hardcore RPG.

This also depends on opinions. To me, cRPGs are *not* about choices, consequences and restrictions. To me they're about character development and good gameplay, fun and interesting quests. So, I would also give Oblivion a 90%+ while Gothics are more of a 70%, but again, it's personal opinion.